Search

To assess the application of a structured process to consolidate the number of medication administration times for residents of aged care facilities. A nonblinded, matched-pair, cluster randomized controlled trial. Permanent residents who were English-speaking and taking at least 1 regular medication, recruited from 8 South Australian residential aged care facilities (RACFs). The intervention involved a clinical pharmacist applying a validated 5-step tool to identify opportunities to reduce medication complexity (eg, by administering medications at the same time or through use of longer-acting or combination formulations). Residents in the comparison group received routine care. The primary outcome at 4-month follow-up was the number of administration times per day for medications charted regularly. Resident satisfaction and quality of life were secondary outcomes. Harms included falls, medication incidents, hospitalizations, and mortality. The association between the intervention and primary outcome was estimated using linear mixed models. Overall, 99 residents participated in the intervention arm and 143 in the comparison arm. At baseline, the mean resident age was 86 years, 74% were female, and medications were taken an average of 4 times daily. Medication simplification was possible for 62 (65%) residents in the intervention arm, with 57 (62%) of 92 simplification recommendations implemented at follow-up. The mean number of administration times at follow-up was reduced in the intervention arm in comparison to usual care (−0.36, 95% confidence interval −0.63 to −0.09, P =.01). No significant changes in secondary outcomes or harms were observed. One-off application of a structured tool to reduce regimen complexity is a low-risk intervention to reduce the burden of medication administration in RACFs and may enable staff to shift time to other resident care activities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To explore variation in medication regimen complexity in residential aged care facilities (RACFs) according to resident age, length of stay, comorbidity, dementia severity, frailty, and dependence in activities of daily living (ADLs), and compare number of daily administration times and Medication Regimen Complexity Index (MRCI) as measures of regimen complexity., Methods: This study was a cross-sectional analysis of baseline data from the SImplification of Medications Prescribed to Long-tErm care Residents (SIMPLER) cluster-randomized controlled trial. The SIMPLER study recruited 242 residents with at least one medication charted for regular administration from 8 RACFs in South Australia. Comorbidity was assessed using the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). Dementia severity was assessed using the Dementia Severity Rating Scale. Frailty was assessed using the FRAIL-NH scale. Dependence in ADLs was assessed using the Katz ADL scale., Results: The median age of participants was 87 years (interquartile range 81-92). Over one-third of participants (n=86, 36%) had 5 or more daily medication administration times. The number of daily administration times and MRCI scores were positively correlated with resident length of stay (r s =0.19; 0.27), FRAIL-NH score (r s =0.23; 0.34) and dependence in ADLs (r s =-0.21; -0.33) (all p<0.01). MRCI was weakly negatively correlated with CCI score (r s =-0.16; p=0.013). Neither number of daily administration times nor MRCI score were correlated with age or dementia severity. In multivariate analysis, frailty was associated with number of daily administration times (OR: 1.13, 95% CI: 1.03-1.24) and MRCI score (OR: 1.26, 95% CI: 1.13-1.41). Dementia severity was inversely associated with both multiple medication administration times (OR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.94-0.99) and high MRCI score (OR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.92-0.98)., Conclusion: Residents with longer lengths of stay, more dependent in ADLs and most frail had the most complex medication regimens and, therefore, may benefit from targeted strategies to reduce medication regimen complexity., Competing Interests: This work was supported by the NHMRC Cognitive Decline Partnership Centre (grant number GNT9100000). The Cognitive Decline Partnership Centre receives support from the NHMRC and funding partners including Helping Hand Aged Care, HammondCare, Brightwater and Dementia Australia. The contents of the published materials are solely the responsibility of the individual authors identified, and do not reflect the views of the NHMRC and any other funding bodies or the funding partners. EYHC was supported by a postgraduate research scholarship funded by the Cognitive Decline Partnership Centre and the Monash University Faculty of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences. JSB was supported by an NHMRC Dementia Research Leadership Fellowship. MC, MH and JvE are employed by Helping Hand Aged Care. JKS and JI were supported by NHMRC Early Career Fellowships. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work., (© 2019 Chen et al.)

Background: An intervention 'Better Oral Health in Home Care' was introduced (2012-2014) to improve the oral health of older people receiving community aged care services. Implementation of the intervention was theoretically framed by the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services framework. Process outcomes demonstrated significant improvements in older people's oral health., Objective: To evaluate the extent to which the intervention has been embedded and sustained into routine community aged care practice 3 years after the initial implementation project., Design: A Realist Evaluation applying Normalisation Process Theory within a single case study setting., Setting: Community aged care (home care) provider in South Australia, Australia., Participants: Purposeful sampling was undertaken. Twelve staff members were recruited from corporate, management and direct care positions. Two consumers representing high and low care recipients also participated., Methods: Qualitative methods were applied in two subcases, reflecting different contextual settings. Data were collected via semi-structured interviews and analysed deductively by applying the Normalisation Process Theory core constructs (with the recommended phases of the Realist Evaluation cycle). Retrospective and prospective analytic methods investigated how the intervention has been operationalised by comparing two timeframes: Time 1 (Implementation June 2012-December 2014) and Time 2 (Post-implementation July 2017-July 2018)., Results: At Time 1, the initial program theory proposed that multi-level facilitation contributed to a favourable context that triggered positive mechanisms supportive of building organisational and workforce oral healthcare capacity. At Time 2, an alternative program theory of how the intervention has unfolded in practice described a changed context following the withdrawal of the project facilitation processes with the triggering of alternative mechanisms that have made it difficult for staff to embed sustainable practice., Conclusion: Findings concur with the literature that successful implementation outcomes do not necessarily guarantee sustainability. The study has provided a deeper explanation of how contextual characteristics have contributed to the conceptualisation of oral healthcare as a low priority, basic work-ready personal care task and how this, in turn, hindered the embedding of sustainable oral healthcare into routine community aged care practice. This understanding can be used to better inform the development of strategies, such as multi-level facilitation, needed to navigate contextual barriers so that sustainable practice can be achieved., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)